Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I had hopes this would work like the AoS app, which is actually decent.
I’m not really seeing any value to buying the monthly though.
Just pushes people to pay each month for something they already paid for.
Kinda reminds me of final fantasy back a while.
Pay for the game, pay for PlayStation online, pay for final fantasy online sub so you can play it.
A £40 game turned into a £200 a year game with a one off payment of £40 for the actual game.
If they want to charge, bump it up to £10 per month, add in each and every codex as it’s released for subscribers.
That way people are dropping £120 a year for all of the most up to date rules.
Not for everyone I know, but if your paying for something then it has to have some actual value to it.
Karol wrote: I wonder what stopped them from just making it work like the AoS app. Seems strange to put out something like a list building app, but it doesn't have the option to build lists.
I suspect it's to do with how much more complicated 40k's list building is than AoS. In AoS units tend to only have 1-2 options for weapons and they're usually fixed at a whole unit taking a different option or 1 in every 5 taking a specific weapon upgrade. Characters generally have no equipment options, or very limited ones. 40k units and characters have lots and lots of options, usually chosen from a set of different lists but also sometimes seemingly arbitrarily selected. It's not an insurmountable issue and the developer really should have been able to deliver given that most of the way army creation works hasn't fundamentally changed between 8th and 9th, but it is different enough to make just copying the AoS app and reskinning it impossible. All those different options are also the reason BattleScribe is such a royal pain to use on a phone to create lists with.
ah, I thought that AoS units come with different weapons, but my knowladge about the game is limited to seeing it being played on the table next to me for a few months a long time ago.
Wish they started to work on it sooner. Had like all 8th ed to prep for it.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Seabass wrote: What I am surprised about is, honestly, is the reaction to the price tag. 6.00 a month is not a lot of money.
Now, if you don't see value in the price, or the value at all in this app, that's perfectly fine and I don't blame people for not wanting to use it if they feel this way.
But I've seen a lot of comments about how high the price is and I truly can't understand how, in our hobby, that 6.00 would even raise an eyebrow.
(shrugs) $ spent on a product that doesn't fulfill my needs is $ wasted. Doesn't matter how large or small the amount.
I suspect that they would have preferred to have the army builder live for launch, but it wasn’t ready. And they decided the PR backlash would be better for it being delayed then being a bug filled mess that didn’t work right. The old project adage: “Fast, cheep, good; pick two” (If you are lucky, sometimes you only get to pick one)
40k list building is a mess. I love that it is. It allows for all sorts of customization, flavor, and personality. I think the reduction of options in newer kits is the worst thing that’s happened to the hobby. But lists and lookup tables, item swaps and restrictions, exclusive items, relics, etc. are a lot harder to juggle then just a check box for fixed options.
Karol wrote: ah, I thought that AoS units come with different weapons, but my knowladge about the game is limited to seeing it being played on the table next to me for a few months a long time ago.
Wish they started to work on it sooner. Had like all 8th ed to prep for it.
A few units have weapon options, but they are never priced differently. In some cases - like with Skullreapers - they've combined the weapon profiles into a single stat line.
The Newman wrote: Well, we know that they missed the release target...
I'm betting that's because they don't want to release it until ca 2020 is released. If the app has points then there would be little reason to buy ca if you don't plan on playing in tournaments.
Moorecox wrote: If they had launched the app today sales for CA would have been diminished.
CA is for missions. Points are just the side-gig.
A BIG side-gig, especially for people who don't play tournaments, since for better or worse that's what gw is marketing it as. I'd say the missions will probably be just fine for non-tournament play though.
What really interests me about ca 2020 is it looks like it contains all the rules without the extra price of lore that I already know. So finally that mini-brb that they botched earlier.
Nevelon wrote: I suspect that they would have preferred to have the army builder live for launch, but it wasn’t ready. And they decided the PR backlash would be better for it being delayed then being a bug filled mess that didn’t work right. The old project adage: “Fast, cheep, good; pick two” (If you are lucky, sometimes you only get to pick one)
40k list building is a mess. I love that it is. It allows for all sorts of customization, flavor, and personality. I think the reduction of options in newer kits is the worst thing that’s happened to the hobby. But lists and lookup tables, item swaps and restrictions, exclusive items, relics, etc. are a lot harder to juggle then just a check box for fixed options.
It likely still will be a buggy mess at release, these things always seem to have that issue. How bad the bugs are, and how quickly they are fixed will be the determining factor for how well it gets adopted in time. Personally, as complex as 40K list building is and the "eh, good enough" rules team at GW, I don't have high hopes.
Nevelon wrote: I suspect that they would have preferred to have the army builder live for launch, but it wasn’t ready. And they decided the PR backlash would be better for it being delayed then being a bug filled mess that didn’t work right. The old project adage: “Fast, cheep, good; pick two” (If you are lucky, sometimes you only get to pick one)
40k list building is a mess. I love that it is. It allows for all sorts of customization, flavor, and personality. I think the reduction of options in newer kits is the worst thing that’s happened to the hobby. But lists and lookup tables, item swaps and restrictions, exclusive items, relics, etc. are a lot harder to juggle then just a check box for fixed options.
It likely still will be a buggy mess at release, these things always seem to have that issue. How bad the bugs are, and how quickly they are fixed will be the determining factor for how well it gets adopted in time. Personally, as complex as 40K list building is and the "eh, good enough" rules team at GW, I don't have high hopes.
I suspect you are correct. I assume that this is not being coded by GW themselves, so the question is who is doing it, and how good they are. But even if they are great, the bug fixes are probably going to have to be filtered through the rules team. Someone writes in “The app doesn’t let me take a thunder hammer on my reiver sarge” is not a bug, that’s working as intended. “The app doesn’t let me take a TH on my intercessor sarge” however IS a bug. Code boffins going to know the difference? And that’s a pretty clear case, there are a lot more tricky ones with the substitutions and swaps. There is also the question of how the app is going to deal with legends and FW. Which adds a LOT more scope to situations they need to cover. Any beta/playtest can never get the number of eyes on something that a live version does, so all sorts of these things are going to hit once it’s out in the wild.
I hope it works well, but I’m keeping my battlescribe up to date. (Also because I prefer to do my list building on the computer, not my phone)
Gadzilla666 wrote: A BIG side-gig, especially for people who don't play tournaments, since for better or worse that's what gw is marketing it as. I'd say the missions will probably be just fine for non-tournament play though.
What really interests me about ca 2020 is it looks like it contains all the rules without the extra price of lore that I already know. So finally that mini-brb that they botched earlier.
Personally, if they would sell the points part separate I would only get the missions. What benefit do you have from owning that book? After a few days there will be an update for Battlescribe and the points that you paid money for (since it is in the package) are non relevant to have as a physical copy.
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
I'm pretty optimistic, since I already use the AoS App, which is much better than BattleScribe.
That being said, I'm not going to pay for a subscription until the List building functionality is introduced.
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Well a list building app that can't list build, and that comes with a subscription, but you still have to buy the separate books sounds aweful from a customers point of view.
Specialy when there is already a digital version of ones codex rules, which is free.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
Optimistic. Battlescribe on a tablet is slow, clunky, has a terrible UI design and clunky UX. If you don't already know what you're looking for and and where it should be you wont find it. The files, community driven as they are, are updated and re-organised in a haphazard fashion so that updates often break the formatting rules for an army list that has been saved. And let's not even go into load times or that there are often errors within the data presented.
The expectation is it being at the lower price point, not in it's functionality. By the looks of it, it has the same functionality as Azyr (minus the free unit rules but that's a difference between AoS and 40K that can't be pinned onto the app as a failure). It's just costing more. A release date slipping by a few weeks due to Covid? It can happen, heck can you confirm that the app's current release date wasn't the same as the intended pre-order date for Indomitus when said app was announced. Because, if that was the case, then they weren't wrong when they announced that originally. But that's conjecture on my part since neither of us has that sort of information.
The higher price is giving users everything from 8th. Every rule, every codex, and by the wording of all 8th ed rules it even includes the PA/Vigilus books.
So no, until we have the app in hand anyone saying that it has bad/awful/poor functionality is basing that entirely on it having a higher subscription cost than the AoS app and not because they've actually used it.
I'm pretty optimistic, since I already use the AoS App, which is much better than BattleScribe.
That being said, I'm not going to pay for a subscription until the List building functionality is introduced.
As has been mentioned, AoS is a vastly simpler game. I'm quite skeptical of GW delivering an app that meets the customization needs required for 40k with better UI/UX than BattleScribe. And the idea that GW is suddenly going to create an app free of errors when their books are chock full of them (to a much greater extent than BS ever is) seems really unlikely to me.
But hey, we'll see in a week? A month? A year? I don't know, because GW won't even commit to a release date. Just to remind folks, they said there was going to be an app for 8th ed too (okay, I suspect the app will eventually come out, they've given a lot more details than they ever did with the 8th ed launch, but the lack of a release date is pretty bad).
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
Optimistic. Battlescribe on a tablet is slow, clunky, has a terrible UI design and clunky UX. If you don't already know what you're looking for and and where it should be you wont find it. The files, community driven as they are, are updated and re-organised in a haphazard fashion so that updates often break the formatting rules for an army list that has been saved. And let's not even go into load times or that there are often errors within the data presented.
The expectation is it being at the lower price point, not in it's functionality. By the looks of it, it has the same functionality as Azyr (minus the free unit rules but that's a difference between AoS and 40K that can't be pinned onto the app as a failure). It's just costing more. A release date slipping by a few weeks due to Covid? It can happen, heck can you confirm that the app's current release date wasn't the same as the intended pre-order date for Indomitus when said app was announced. Because, if that was the case, then they weren't wrong when they announced that originally. But that's conjecture on my part since neither of us has that sort of information.
The higher price is giving users everything from 8th. Every rule, every codex, and by the wording of all 8th ed rules it even includes the PA/Vigilus books.
So no, until we have the app in hand anyone saying that it has bad/awful/poor functionality is basing that entirely on it having a higher subscription cost than the AoS app and not because they've actually used it.
*by the looks of it*? If you're going to jump on somebody for being pessimistic about the app, you better not do the exact same thing for white knight purposes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/12 19:35:08
Giving the 8th edition books as part of the subscription is just backwards compatibility with books that don't have their one-use codes printed in them. Anyone who's actually gonna pay for this app has already been playing 40k long enough to have the 8th edition books relevant to their collection, nobody's getting "free" books with this subscription unless you're really excited about fact checking your opponents' rules.
Battlescribe obviously has some issues (slowness, sometimes counterintuative), but it is pretty much ubiquitous and basically free. GW must be aware that their app must compare favourably to the current market leader, or it will fail embarrassingly.
I'm pretty optimistic, since I already use the AoS App, which is much better than BattleScribe.
That being said, I'm not going to pay for a subscription until the List building functionality is introduced.
As has been mentioned, AoS is a vastly simpler game. I'm quite skeptical of GW delivering an app that meets the customization needs required for 40k with better UI/UX than BattleScribe. And the idea that GW is suddenly going to create an app free of errors when their books are chock full of them (to a much greater extent than BS ever is) seems really unlikely to me.
But hey, we'll see in a week? A month? A year? I don't know, because GW won't even commit to a release date. Just to remind folks, they said there was going to be an app for 8th ed too (okay, I suspect the app will eventually come out, they've given a lot more details than they ever did with the 8th ed launch, but the lack of a release date is pretty bad).
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
Optimistic. Battlescribe on a tablet is slow, clunky, has a terrible UI design and clunky UX. If you don't already know what you're looking for and and where it should be you wont find it. The files, community driven as they are, are updated and re-organised in a haphazard fashion so that updates often break the formatting rules for an army list that has been saved. And let's not even go into load times or that there are often errors within the data presented.
The expectation is it being at the lower price point, not in it's functionality. By the looks of it, it has the same functionality as Azyr (minus the free unit rules but that's a difference between AoS and 40K that can't be pinned onto the app as a failure). It's just costing more. A release date slipping by a few weeks due to Covid? It can happen, heck can you confirm that the app's current release date wasn't the same as the intended pre-order date for Indomitus when said app was announced. Because, if that was the case, then they weren't wrong when they announced that originally. But that's conjecture on my part since neither of us has that sort of information.
The higher price is giving users everything from 8th. Every rule, every codex, and by the wording of all 8th ed rules it even includes the PA/Vigilus books.
So no, until we have the app in hand anyone saying that it has bad/awful/poor functionality is basing that entirely on it having a higher subscription cost than the AoS app and not because they've actually used it.
*by the looks of it*? If you're going to jump on somebody for being pessimistic about the app, you better not do the exact same thing for white knight purposes.
Yes, AoS is a simpler game, but it's really not that more complicated to build on the basis of how Azyr works. You already have the options for certain weapon loadouts, relics, warlord traits subfactions, etc. The baseline is already present and the UI is much cleaner.
I'm pretty optimistic, since I already use the AoS App, which is much better than BattleScribe.
That being said, I'm not going to pay for a subscription until the List building functionality is introduced.
As has been mentioned, AoS is a vastly simpler game. I'm quite skeptical of GW delivering an app that meets the customization needs required for 40k with better UI/UX than BattleScribe. And the idea that GW is suddenly going to create an app free of errors when their books are chock full of them (to a much greater extent than BS ever is) seems really unlikely to me.
But hey, we'll see in a week? A month? A year? I don't know, because GW won't even commit to a release date. Just to remind folks, they said there was going to be an app for 8th ed too (okay, I suspect the app will eventually come out, they've given a lot more details than they ever did with the 8th ed launch, but the lack of a release date is pretty bad).
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
Optimistic. Battlescribe on a tablet is slow, clunky, has a terrible UI design and clunky UX. If you don't already know what you're looking for and and where it should be you wont find it. The files, community driven as they are, are updated and re-organised in a haphazard fashion so that updates often break the formatting rules for an army list that has been saved. And let's not even go into load times or that there are often errors within the data presented.
The expectation is it being at the lower price point, not in it's functionality. By the looks of it, it has the same functionality as Azyr (minus the free unit rules but that's a difference between AoS and 40K that can't be pinned onto the app as a failure). It's just costing more. A release date slipping by a few weeks due to Covid? It can happen, heck can you confirm that the app's current release date wasn't the same as the intended pre-order date for Indomitus when said app was announced. Because, if that was the case, then they weren't wrong when they announced that originally. But that's conjecture on my part since neither of us has that sort of information.
The higher price is giving users everything from 8th. Every rule, every codex, and by the wording of all 8th ed rules it even includes the PA/Vigilus books.
So no, until we have the app in hand anyone saying that it has bad/awful/poor functionality is basing that entirely on it having a higher subscription cost than the AoS app and not because they've actually used it.
*by the looks of it*? If you're going to jump on somebody for being pessimistic about the app, you better not do the exact same thing for white knight purposes.
Yes, AoS is a simpler game, but it's really not that more complicated to build on the basis of how Azyr works. You already have the options for certain weapon loadouts, relics, warlord traits subfactions, etc. The baseline is already present and the UI is much cleaner.
I'll disagree with you there in terms of loadout complexities, but even if I don't, why the delay in availability then? Seems like it would be pretty easy to leverage and extend.
I'm pretty optimistic, since I already use the AoS App, which is much better than BattleScribe.
That being said, I'm not going to pay for a subscription until the List building functionality is introduced.
As has been mentioned, AoS is a vastly simpler game. I'm quite skeptical of GW delivering an app that meets the customization needs required for 40k with better UI/UX than BattleScribe. And the idea that GW is suddenly going to create an app free of errors when their books are chock full of them (to a much greater extent than BS ever is) seems really unlikely to me.
But hey, we'll see in a week? A month? A year? I don't know, because GW won't even commit to a release date. Just to remind folks, they said there was going to be an app for 8th ed too (okay, I suspect the app will eventually come out, they've given a lot more details than they ever did with the 8th ed launch, but the lack of a release date is pretty bad).
grouchoben wrote: It's a dirty cash grab with awful functionality. It actually shows GW's hand a little bit in terms of how it perceives its customer base.
Since you've had experience using the app in question, could you detail specifically what the awful functionality is.
From someone that is in the dev/IT profession.
Oh, gimme a break... let's turn this around. From somebody else in the IT profession, are you optimistic, pessimistic, or neutral on the likelihood of GW delivering a roster app of higher quality than Battlescribe?
Putting it another way... I think most folks here were hopeful for for a 40k version of the AoS app at a similar price point. We know the price point is much higher. We are missing info on the functionality but given that the release slipped out (which, isn't surprising but if they didn't think they could hold a date, don't announce a date), I think that casts a shadow around the functionality as well since the app clearly wasn't ready. Missing the release means time crunches which means hastily put together fixes.
Optimistic. Battlescribe on a tablet is slow, clunky, has a terrible UI design and clunky UX. If you don't already know what you're looking for and and where it should be you wont find it. The files, community driven as they are, are updated and re-organised in a haphazard fashion so that updates often break the formatting rules for an army list that has been saved. And let's not even go into load times or that there are often errors within the data presented.
The expectation is it being at the lower price point, not in it's functionality. By the looks of it, it has the same functionality as Azyr (minus the free unit rules but that's a difference between AoS and 40K that can't be pinned onto the app as a failure). It's just costing more. A release date slipping by a few weeks due to Covid? It can happen, heck can you confirm that the app's current release date wasn't the same as the intended pre-order date for Indomitus when said app was announced. Because, if that was the case, then they weren't wrong when they announced that originally. But that's conjecture on my part since neither of us has that sort of information.
The higher price is giving users everything from 8th. Every rule, every codex, and by the wording of all 8th ed rules it even includes the PA/Vigilus books.
So no, until we have the app in hand anyone saying that it has bad/awful/poor functionality is basing that entirely on it having a higher subscription cost than the AoS app and not because they've actually used it.
*by the looks of it*? If you're going to jump on somebody for being pessimistic about the app, you better not do the exact same thing for white knight purposes.
Yes, AoS is a simpler game, but it's really not that more complicated to build on the basis of how Azyr works. You already have the options for certain weapon loadouts, relics, warlord traits subfactions, etc. The baseline is already present and the UI is much cleaner.
I'll disagree with you there in terms of loadout complexities, but even if I don't, why the delay in availability then? Seems like it would be pretty easy to leverage and extend.
I think it's pretty safe to say that COVID could have had something to do with it. We really don't know the extent of it's effect on internal operations.
I'll disagree with you there in terms of loadout complexities, but even if I don't, why the delay in availability then? Seems like it would be pretty easy to leverage and extend.
40K is far more complex.
You have to pick detachments. You need to fulfill the requirements of each detachment. Some units break the detachment expectations and some are dependent on other units you take. AoS characters have almost no options to choose, either.
Picking weapons in 40K is a model by model basis. In Azyr you check a box. It isn't "do my Tzaangors have 3 greatblades". Its "my Tzaangors have greatblades and if I didn't model the maximum possible then *shrug*". You also purchase in blocks and there is no such thing as equipping a sarge differently - who often has wildly different wargear options in 40K.
Weapon prices are also model dependent and increasingly more so.
AoS also has one "Allegiance / Legion" plus allies. 40K can have three such allegiances with customizable legions for many armies.
And then things like Tyranids and their new system that replaes relics.
I'll disagree with you there in terms of loadout complexities, but even if I don't, why the delay in availability then? Seems like it would be pretty easy to leverage and extend.
40K is far more complex.
You have to pick detachments. You need to fulfill the requirements of each detachment. Some units break the detachment expectations and some are dependent on other units you take. AoS characters have almost no options to choose, either.
Picking weapons in 40K is a model by model basis. In Azyr you check a box. It isn't "do my Tzaangors have 3 greatblades". Its "my Tzaangors have greatblades and if I didn't model the maximum possible then *shrug*". You also purchase in blocks and there is no such thing as equipping a sarge differently - who often has wildly different wargear options in 40K.
Weapon prices are also model dependent and increasingly more so.
AoS also has one "Allegiance / Legion" plus allies. 40K can have three such allegiances with customizable legions for many armies.
And then things like Tyranids and their new system that replaes relics.
It is absurdly diverse.
Yeah, I fully agree. That's why I find the bagging on Battlescribe in this thread to be confusing because I think Battlescribe does a pretty good job navigating that (while keeping a reasonably usable UI) as an open source app. The idea that GW (or really some contractor) will be able to pick it up and do it better immediately seems unlikely.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
4k Points
Competition Index
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
